If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
"Champ" wrote in message ... | On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 06:14:37 +0100, "PG" | wrote: | | | "Champ" wrote in message | .. . | | On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:23:40 +0100, "PG" | | wrote: | | | | Back on the subject of helmets, my 12 year old watched a shot of Baxter | | on Ski Sunday in the slalom, and was disgusted that he wasn't wearing a | | helmet - ok it wasn't a speed discipline, but they really can | travel... | | | | She was disgusted? That a grown mad could make his own judgement on | | what precautions to take for his own life? See, this is what happens | | when we insist that kids wear helmets.... | | She was disgusted with what she saw as the example she felt was being | set, actually. A pretty mature position to hold for a youngster, | certainly beats jumping to conclusions about the motives/thinking of | others as you've just done! | | What a load of double-think! She's the target audience, and yet she | was complaining that an adult was setting her a bad example? Surely | if it really was a bad example, she'd be saying "way cool, no helmet"? She's a ski racer as I pointed out earlier, and in the full British children's team. She lives in Les Arcs and races everything from slalom to super G. She's trained by the 98 Olympic downhill champion week in week out, and isn't some fortnight a year ski tourist spouting forth on a topic he/she knows next to nothing about. Make your mind up - on the one hand you say a 12 year old is old enough to think for herself and then you carp when she has an opinion on the subject. Her view, from the experience of free skiing and ski racing over a five month season each year since she was six, is that a helmet has stopped her from sustaining serious injury on several occasions, and that senior racers should set an example to would-be racers by wearing a helmet. Pete |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Ace wrote:
It's mainly you that's confused. As I understand it (and as a non-UK resident) the requirement is that any such work is done to the certified standards. Nothing's saying the installer must actually be certified, so there's no reason why a householder can't do any amount of re-wiring he/she desires, as long as it meets said standards. In the past the householder could do the work and as long as it was done properly then everyone was happy. Unfortunately the government decided we need more regulations covering this area and brought in the Part P regs. The trouble is that the industry has had a very mixed reaction to the whole thing and even the HSE say it will have very little impact on injuries/deaths so we're left with a scheme that no one seems to want and no one seems to need. A DIYer could do a whole rewire themselves but it would now need certifying by Building Control, which adds more expense than was involved before. -- James... www.jameshart.co.uk |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Jason Pereira wrote:
James Hart wrote: David Mahon wrote: In article , John Ricketts writes Nanny-ism is just going too far. As of January, I can't even change my own 3-pin plugs at home now! Can't you? Still see them on sale (together with all the kit you need to rewire your house if desired). Not sure what country they live in but the UK has just had Part P kick into action and the amount of bull**** that's being spread about it is unbeleivable. Certain electrical jobs around the home are now subject to restrictions but even the relevant authorities don't seem to know what's supposed to happen and how they're supposed to police them. Rewiring a plug is still allowed, replacing a socket is still allowed but other stuff like adding an extra socket must be done by a certified person (for that read "has paid their fees to a certifying body") or under a Building Control Notice (and with the requires fees being paid). So as long as i say i rewired my house in December 2004 i will be ok. Spose all the wire colours all change aswell just to prove dates/times etc!?? now wheres the screwfix catalogue........... It's all nice and confusing, as long as you say you started before 1/1/5 you have until 1/4/5 to finish (the definition of started hasn't been agreed yet, having a written plan could be classed as started for instance). If you start on or after 1/1/5 then it falls under Part P regs. The colours are changing though and they're using an overlapping set of dates for the change (but different to those above) so it's impossible to say when the work was done simply by looking at the colour of the wiring used. -- James... www.jameshart.co.uk |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:49:36 +0100, "PG"
wrote: | She was disgusted with what she saw as the example she felt was being | set, actually. A pretty mature position to hold for a youngster, | certainly beats jumping to conclusions about the motives/thinking of | others as you've just done! | | What a load of double-think! She's the target audience, and yet she | was complaining that an adult was setting her a bad example? Surely | if it really was a bad example, she'd be saying "way cool, no helmet"? She's a ski racer as I pointed out earlier, and in the full British children's team. She lives in Les Arcs and races everything from slalom to super G. She's trained by the 98 Olympic downhill champion week in week out, and isn't some fortnight a year ski tourist spouting forth on a topic he/she knows next to nothing about. Make your mind up - on the one hand you say a 12 year old is old enough to think for herself and then you carp when she has an opinion on the subject. Yes, she's old enough to have a valuable opinion. Her view, from the experience of free skiing and ski racing over a five month season each year since she was six, is that a helmet has stopped her from sustaining serious injury on several occasions, And this is quite reasonable too. and that senior racers should set an example to would-be racers by wearing a helmet. This is where it all falls down. The only resposibility a senior racer has is to themselves. Whoever he is, I imagine the racer in question had a reason for not wearing a helmet. Given that it only affects him (i.e. it's only his brain at risk), then why isn't that reason good enough for you and your daughter? -- Champ |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:43:55 +0100, Ace wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:32:00 +0000, Champ wrote: Waiting in the queue for lift 10 at Kirkwood to open a few days ago, Hey, I thought you were at Squaw. What did you reckon to Kirkwood then (apart from the five feet of powder you texted me about)? We were muchly impressed when we skied there in November, and that was with only the middle four chairs running. Loads of off-piste stuff, both open and in the trees, and quite a lot of it pretty steep too. I loved it - never too crowded, even during the US holidays, *loads* of tree skiing (which, considering the visibility most of the time, was a good thing), and plenty of steep stuff. A couple of runs we took off "The Wave" when they finally opened it on my last day there were as good as an heli runs I've done (tho considerably shorted). there were about 50~60 diehards - all up early, and prepared to queue to get first tracks (on a run that hadn't been open for 36 hours, with lots of fresh). Which run? We got 2nd chair (!), so in those circumstances, with several feet of fresh, I think the only choice is to ride back under the lift, whooping as you go :-) The subsequent runs we did were all down the various Wagon Wheel chutes, and then a little later they opened up Eagle Bowl and we did some runs over there. Me and Iain, both British, didn't have helmets. Of the rest (all American, as far as I could tell), around 90% wore helmets. Maybe those guys *really* rip, but I couldn't see their justification, myself. I guess it becomes so automatic they wouldn't think of _not_ wearing them. I think that's it exactly. And, as I said elsewhere in this thread, if you've grown up wearing a helmet, then you're probably less likely as a young adult to say "hey, I can decide for myself now - do I want to wear this thing?". -- Champ |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
"Champ" wrote in message ... | On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:49:36 +0100, "PG" | wrote: | | | She was disgusted with what she saw as the example she felt was being | | set, actually. A pretty mature position to hold for a youngster, | | certainly beats jumping to conclusions about the motives/thinking of | | others as you've just done! | | | | What a load of double-think! She's the target audience, and yet she | | was complaining that an adult was setting her a bad example? Surely | | if it really was a bad example, she'd be saying "way cool, no helmet"? | | She's a ski racer as I pointed out earlier, and in the full British | children's team. She lives in Les Arcs and races everything from slalom | to super G. She's trained by the 98 Olympic downhill champion week in | week out, and isn't some fortnight a year ski tourist spouting forth on | a topic he/she knows next to nothing about. Make your mind up - on the | one hand you say a 12 year old is old enough to think for herself and | then you carp when she has an opinion on the subject. | | Yes, she's old enough to have a valuable opinion. | | Her view, from the | experience of free skiing and ski racing over a five month season each | year since she was six, is that a helmet has stopped her from sustaining | serious injury on several occasions, | | And this is quite reasonable too. | | and that senior racers should set | an example to would-be racers by wearing a helmet. | | This is where it all falls down. The only resposibility a senior | racer has is to themselves. Whoever he is, I imagine the racer in | question had a reason for not wearing a helmet. Given that it only | affects him (i.e. it's only his brain at risk), then why isn't that | reason good enough for you and your daughter? | -- Children look up to the racing elite and emulate them. Her opinion is that by not setting an example he is letting her generation down. Whether you/the racer concerned/whoever thinks that the only responsibility is to oneself is simply one standpoint. There are those who think differently, and it is an entirely acceptable position to hold, and argue. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
On 10 Jan 2005 15:40:02 GMT, "David Mahon" wrote:
Champ wrote: This is where it all falls down. The only resposibility a senior racer has is to themselves. Whoever he is, I imagine the racer in question had a reason for not wearing a helmet. Given that it only affects him (i.e. it's only his brain at risk), then why isn't that reason good enough for you and your daughter? Not true - there are incidents now where skiers/boarders with helmets have collided with other skiers/boarders and caused significant injury (I'm not sure about death) that may be attributable to their helmets. Well, yes, this is the whole "risk compensation" behaviour phenomenon, and another argument for not having wide use of helmets on the slopes, imo. -- Champ |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:36:12 +0100, "PG"
wrote: | and that senior racers should set | an example to would-be racers by wearing a helmet. | | This is where it all falls down. The only resposibility a senior | racer has is to themselves. Whoever he is, I imagine the racer in | question had a reason for not wearing a helmet. Given that it only | affects him (i.e. it's only his brain at risk), then why isn't that | reason good enough for you and your daughter? | -- Children look up to the racing elite and emulate them. Your daughter doesn't seem to. But I guess she's different. Her opinion is that by not setting an example he is letting her generation down. Whether you/the racer concerned/whoever thinks that the only responsibility is to oneself is simply one standpoint. There are those who think differently, and it is an entirely acceptable position to hold, and argue. I don't think you've really argued it. The proposition would seem to be that senior racers not wearing helmets encourages children not to wear helmets. However, the one example you have, your daughter, gives the opposite result. I would argue the following : "Senior racers taking responsibility for their own safety encourages children to take responsbility for themselves too". Is my arguement any more or less provable than yours? -- Champ |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:02:46 +0000, Champ wrote:
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:36:12 +0100, "PG" wrote: Her opinion is that by not setting an example he is letting her generation down. Whether you/the racer concerned/whoever thinks that the only responsibility is to oneself is simply one standpoint. There are those who think differently, and it is an entirely acceptable position to hold, and argue. I don't think you've really argued it. The proposition would seem to be that senior racers not wearing helmets encourages children not to wear helmets. However, the one example you have, your daughter, gives the opposite result. I would argue the following : "Senior racers taking responsibility for their own safety encourages children to take responsbility for themselves too". Is my arguement any more or less provable than yours? I think the available evidence would support a similar argument : "Senior racers taking responsibility for their own safety encourages children to discuss the issues involved". Which is a good thing, IMO. -- Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom) Ski Club of Great Britain - http://www.skiclub.co.uk All opinions expressed are personal and in no way represent those of the Ski Club. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
About 6 years ago one of the lifites at Kirkwood (Seth) spun out racing
down to chair 4 (ask Iain about that..). Seth died from side impact on his head. Since then helmets have been acceptable and proper at Kirkwood. Like you said, almost everyone wears them. Especially snowboarding where we are vulnerable to catching an edge a helmet is more valuable. I know it has saved me from at lesst a serious headache more than few times. You, Champ, don't ride that fast or jump so I suppose you are less vunerable to impact. Other reasons for wearing a helmet: 1. Prevents head from sticking to the snow while sliding (neck injury) 2. Suspends goggles so the don't squeeze your head. 2. keeps you warm so you don't need a goofy head gaitor. "Ride for Seth" "Let Seth Ride" Champ wrote: On 10 Jan 2005 12:46:12 GMT, Switters wrote: On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 21:45:17 GMT, "John Ricketts" allegedly wrote: Nice picture!....granted, I wouldn't contemplate racing without one, but isn't this just the nanny state philosophy kicking in yet again? I reckon its less about protecting the individual than about minimising the risk of litigation! It's interesting that in the more litigious USA, helmets are not compulsory but are certainly more common. The ski areas haven't mandated their use out of fear of being sued, yet the majority appears to wear them. That's cos yanks are weenies :-) Waiting in the queue for lift 10 at Kirkwood to open a few days ago, there were about 50~60 diehards - all up early, and prepared to queue to get first tracks (on a run that hadn't been open for 36 hours, with lots of fresh). Me and Iain, both British, didn't have helmets. Of the rest (all American, as far as I could tell), around 90% wore helmets. Maybe those guys *really* rip, but I couldn't see their justification, myself. -- Champ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Helmets | Scott Elliot | Nordic Skiing | 2 | September 21st 04 11:08 PM |
Helmets - any available with soft padding? | Henry | Snowboarding | 8 | February 26th 04 12:54 PM |
Helmets | Steve Haigh | European Ski Resorts | 50 | February 5th 04 04:46 PM |
Giro Nine helmets in stock at $79.95 | [email protected] | Marketplace | 0 | December 17th 03 11:41 AM |
Helmets - thermal protection | Ian Turek | Snowboarding | 4 | November 13th 03 06:35 PM |